Bigfatbillsfan Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Ohio Obama...it's over. How can they call Ohio for Obama with it being so close and only 65% of the districts reporting? That just doesn't seem right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Candidate for what? Black GOP candidate for President. Not sure that a gay GOP candidate for any national political office would be supported. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 will you make a thread w/ a million word count about how completely and passionately wrong you were for the entire summer? I would...if I had been wrong. Show me a battleground state with a D+6 or higher turnout. Romney is well on his way to winning the popular vote, and even if he loses it, it's still not a D+6 or higher nationally. How can they call Ohio for Obama with it being so close and only 65% of the districts reporting? That just doesn't seem right. Jesus....now it's down to 911 vote difference? This may not be over? Man....what a clusterF if that's wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 if romney had started moderate and remained moderate rather than starting far right and turning moderate the last 2 weeks he would have done better. still has a slim chance as it is. That's the nature of primaries. You go hard to your side, then race to the middle. He never struck up passion in conservatives or libertarians b/c he was too liberal. But to liberals posing as moderates he , like McCain, was too Republican. And you can take "too" out of that last sentence & it still works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Large Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Yadda.. Yadda.... Ths country still has huge isses to face..... We need to get to task..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 (edited) I agree with this mostly. I don't know if tolerant is the right word though. I don't remember most Democrats being tolerant about most things. I think it comes down to the candidate themselves, and if the can explain their..."extra-party"? position. But, the GOP has to realize that the national view on a lot of things ain't the same. But, I don't think that this is that difficult. All you really have to do is focus on liberty. If you support things that constrict liberty in one area, you have a hard time talking about it in another. If anything, it's as you say: some conservative leadership needs to be retired. It's not like there's nobody on the bench who can come in and start. I think that you hit both of these points squarely and correctly. The GOP has a lot of young talent that see things differently and that should be allowed to come off the bench and ball. Steve Fisher eventually had to let those 5 freshman start though convential wisdom (and Dick Vitale) said otherwise. Most importantly though, Mitt Romney was a really bad candidate. He had too many relatability issues to overcome in too short an amount of time. I was told 17 months ago that the WH wanted to go against Mitt and that they were the least concerned about him as a challenger. I told Magox at the time and he pushed that sentiment to the side. Edited November 7, 2012 by Juror#8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Black GOP candidate for President. Not sure that a gay GOP candidate for any national political office would be supported. Wouldn't work. They'd find some chick he !@#$ed, or tried to !@#$, call it sexual harassment, & that's all she wrote. Not to mention you might as well tatoo " Uncle Tom" on the forehead of any black guy who forgets his place & gets uppity enough to challenge the Dems. I think that you hit both of these points squarely and correctly. The GOP has a lot of young talent that see things differently and that should be allowed to come off the bench and ball. Steve Fisher eventually had to let those 5 freshman start though convential wisdom (and Dick Vitale) said otherwise. Most importantly though, Mitt Romney was a really bad candidate. He had too many relatability issues too overcome in too short an amount of time. I was told 17 months ago that the WH wanted to go against Mitt and that they were the least concerned about him as a challenger. I told Magox at the time and he pushed that sentiment to the side. It was the 2nd prez election in a row where the Republicans went with the "safe" candidate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I think that you hit both of these points squarely and correctly. The GOP has a lot of young talent that see things differently and that should be allowed to come off the bench and ball. Steve Fisher eventually had to let those 5 freshman start though convential wisdom (and Dick Vitale) said otherwise. Most importantly though, Mitt Romney was a really bad candidate. He had too many relatability issues to overcome in too short an amount of time. I was told 17 months ago that the WH wanted to go against Mitt and that they were the least concerned about him as a challenger. I told Magox at the time and he pushed that sentiment to the side. Libertarians are going to run wild... Also...what do you think about this Ohio thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 That's the nature of primaries. You go hard to your side, then race to the middle. He never struck up passion in conservatives or libertarians b/c he was too liberal. But to liberals posing as moderates he , like McCain, was too Republican. And you can take "too" out of that last sentence & it still works. no. that's the nature of republican primaries. i didn't see a blatant fight between hillary and obama to be the most liberal in the primaries. it's unique to the repub primaries and thats a function of the divide between grass roots repubs and the majority of the national electorate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Mr Ryan, thank you for your tiny blip on the timeline of American politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Wouldn't work. They'd find some chick he !@#$ed, or tried to !@#$, call it sexual harassment, & that's all she wrote. Not to mention you might as well tatoo " Uncle Tom" on the forehead of any black guy who forgets his place & gets uppity enough to challenge the Dems. It was the 2nd prez election in a row where the Republicans went with the "safe" candidate. 1. Yes. I agree that Rev. Al and a bunch of other race-baiters would Uncle Tom a black GOP candidate. I don't think that the GOP would be too accepting. But I also think that there would be a lot of angst amongst the black political pundit establishment. 2. Yes. Romney was a bad choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 no. that's the nature of republican primaries. i didn't see a blatant fight between hillary and obama to be the most liberal in the primaries. it's unique to the repub primaries and thats a function of the divide between grass roots repubs and the majority of the national electorate. It's politics regardless of party going back centuries. It's just how it goes. Sen Obama was waaay more liberal than Pres candidate Obama was in 08. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 (edited) Libertarians are going to run wild... Also...what do you think about this Ohio thing? What specifically are you referring to? Oh ****, it's 11:40. Bedtime. I'll respond tomorrow to your response. Edited November 7, 2012 by Juror#8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brightgreen Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Can't wait to see what Obama told Putin he can help him with after he was re-elected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Come In Peace Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Can't wait to see what Obama told Putin he can help him with after he was re-elected You'll find out in December. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Mr Ryan, thank you for your tiny blip on the timeline of American politics. If you think Paul Ryan is going anywhere...you have 20 years, never mind another thing, coming. What specifically are you referring to? Do you think it's still too close? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 A hurricane. I can't believe it. A hurricane a week before an election, in which the president doesn't do anything but place a few phone calls and get his picture taken with a fat baby who's in love with Bruce Springsteen, swings the most important election of our time. Such is life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Can't wait to see what Obama told Putin he can help him with after he was re-elected It was nuclear weapons reduction treaties. Oh the horror. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
We Come In Peace Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 A hurricane. I can't believe it. A hurricane a week before an election, in which the president doesn't do anything but place a few phone calls and get his picture taken with a fat baby who's in love with Bruce Springsteen, swings the most important election of our time. Such is life. Yeah. That was it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juror#8 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Romney not conceding Ohio. Hmmmmmm..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whateverdude Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 It was nuclear weapons reduction treaties. Oh the horror. I think it had more to do with missile defense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 1. Yes. I agree that Rev. Al and a bunch of other race-baiters would Uncle Tom a black GOP candidate. I don't think that the GOP would be too accepting. But I also think that there would be a lot of angst amongst the black political pundit establishment. 2. Yes. Romney was a bad choice. You'd be surprised. Most politically active conservatives & libertarians are all about the philosophies & ideas. I went to YAF in '03 & the headliner who everyone was most excited to hear (more than Ann Coulter, Fred Barnes, Jonah Goldberg, or The Ultimate Warrior - all of whom spoke) was Walter Williams. Why? Because WW is !@#$ing sweet. It was genuine admiration, not like the **** you see from moderates who love(d) to talk about how they had as much or more respect for Colon Powell than anyone, to show how fair minded & not racist they were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 What I saw is Ohio has 74% reporting and each candidate with 49% obama has a slight edge of about 20k counted votes. Very tight still Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 In debate terminology, this is what you call "Moving the goalposts". Go back and find one post where I said bad polls = Romney wins. You can't. I am not an idiot. That's something you would have said. I repeatedly said "none of this means Obama will lose". What I did say: somebody, either Axelrod or Gallup is going to be in trouble on Wednesday. And the polls, with a D+6 or higher turnout...do not make sense...still. What I think we're going to find out about this: how we do polling has to change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 obama now ahead in both fla and va..but very close Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Romney not conceding Ohio. Hmmmmmm..... That's what I was asking about.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 It was nuclear weapons reduction treaties. Oh the horror. Don't be simple. The rest of the world isn't reducing their nukes. That's the reality. & There's no harm in us having them as long as we don't use them. Why reduce your arsenal enough to enable someone else to beat you in a nuclear war? MAD worked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 2000 difference in OH right now....man...we may end up having to wait 17 days until the provisional ballots are counted...unless VA goes Blue. We can almost guarantee a recount in FL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 2000 difference in OH right now....man...we may end up having to wait 17 days until the provisional ballots are counted...unless VA goes Blue. We can almost guarantee a recount in FL. doesn't matter...nevada just went blue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 I quit. Luckily I have the means. Good luck y'all, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 doesn't matter...nevada just went blue. and odds are florida or virginia will go blue ... one of those at least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Don't be simple. The rest of the world isn't reducing their nukes. That's the reality. & There's no harm in us having them as long as we don't use them. Why reduce your arsenal enough to enable someone else to beat you in a nuclear war? MAD worked. We have 5k nukes right now. Even cutting that in half would still be enough to blow any continent to hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da Big Man Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Oh my God! Obama* has won using small tactics and failed policies. I hope all the blind sheep that voted for Obama* this time will remember this day. The day that changed this once great Country for ever. Four years of failure after failure and lie after lie...We deserve better. I smell large scale voter fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 doesn't matter...nevada just went blue. that only matters if Colorado does too. not saying it won't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 We have 5k nukes right now. Even cutting that in half would still be enough to blow any continent to hell. So then what's the benefit of cutting it in half? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 So then what's the benefit of cutting it in half? The idea I believe is that we have plenty so if we can cut some that we have over what we need (which is a lot) to get others to cut them and reduce the amount floating around to be stolen or sold then it's a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Oh my God! Obama* has won using small tactics and failed policies. I hope all the blind sheep that voted for Obama* this time will remember this day. The day that changed this once great Country for ever. Four years of failure after failure and lie after lie..We deserve better. I smell large scale voter fraud. It depends on who you mean by "we". Millions of us do deserve better. But as a society we deserve what we get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drinkTHEkoolaid Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Actually right now at 78% reported foxnews has Romney slightly leading ohio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 Oh my God! Obama* has won using small tactics and failed policies. I hope all the blind sheep that voted for Obama* this time will remember this day. The day that changed this once great Country for ever. Four years of failure after failure and lie after lie...We deserve better. I smell large scale voter fraud. Dude... I think the storm is a larger issue than voter fraud. And, none of it is as big as whether social conservatives are forcing the Rs to do stupid things....like lose the the Senate that was easily theirs to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PastaJoe Posted November 7, 2012 Share Posted November 7, 2012 It's over, despite the desperate rants of Karl Rove and Donald Trump. Let's wake up tomorrow and try to come to some compromise to deal with the economic issues. Good night and God bless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts